Legal Opinion

Tozer v. City of Eugene

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 14, 1992No. 16-90-02312; CA A70369PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, P. J.

Plaintiff was injured in an automobile accident that she contends was caused by the negligence of defendants City of Eugene and Noble, the city’s traffic operations supervisor, 1 in failing to inspect, trim and maintain the vegetation near a stop sign. As a result, plaintiff alleges, the driver whose vehicle collided with hers was unable to see the sign, failed to stop, and the accident ensued. The trial court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff appeals, and we reverse.

The ground for defendants’ motion is that they enjoy discretionary immunity under ORS 30.265(3)(c).…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Seeborg v. General Motors CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Reed v. Jackson CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
  3. Pritchard v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Egner v. City of PortlandCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Jones v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  2. Rustvold v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  3. Bakr v. ElliottCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  4. Jones v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  5. Rustvold v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API